| Literature DB >> 33319037 |
James Emmanuel1, Haniza Omar1, Lee T See1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM: The advent of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has provided an inimitable alternative for gaining biliary access in patients who fail conventional endoscopic drainage. The antimigratory features of the partially covered metal stent (PCMS), namely, the flange head and uncovered portion of the stent, makes it a valuable option in patients undergoing EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS). The aim of the study is to evaluate the clinical outcome of EUS-BD via the hepaticogastrostomy approach using PCMS in patients with malignant biliary obstruction after failed ERCP.Entities:
Keywords: endoscopic ultrasound‐guided biliary drainage; malignant biliary obstruction; partially covered metal stent
Year: 2020 PMID: 33319037 PMCID: PMC7731807 DOI: 10.1002/jgh3.12386
Source DB: PubMed Journal: JGH Open ISSN: 2397-9070
Patients’ baseline characteristics
| Parameters | Value |
|---|---|
| Total number of patients | 20 |
| Age (years), mean ± SD | 71.8 ± 7.60 |
| Gender (male/female), | 16 (80%)/4 (20%) |
| Primary disease | |
| Pancreatic cancer, | 13 (65%) |
| Periampullary tumor, | 4 (20%) |
| Cholangiocarcinoma, | 2 (10%) |
| Metastatic colon cancer, | 1 (5%) |
Figure 1Indications for endoscopic ultrasound‐guided hepaticogastrostomy. , failed/incomplete cannulation; , inaccessible papillae; , surgically altered anatomy.
Details of the hepaticogastrostomy procedure
| No | Age | Primary disease | Pattern/location of obstruction | Reason for ERCP failure | Ascitis | Technical success | Clinical success | Stent length (cm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | 81 | Ca head of Pancreas | Distal CBD | Inaccessible papillae | No | Yes | Yes | 10 |
| 2. | 73 | Ca head of Pancreas | Distal CBD | Inaccessible papillae | No | Yes | Yes | 10 |
| 3. | 78 | Ca Colon with duodenal mass | Distal CBD | Surgically altered anatomy | No | Yes | No | 10 |
| 4. | 67 | Cholangiocarcinoma | Distal CBD | Failed/incomplete cannulation | No | Yes | Yes | 10 |
| 5. | 77 | Periampullary tumor | Distal CBD | Inaccessible papillae | Yes | Yes | Yes | 10 |
| 6. | 82 | Periampullary tumor | Distal CBD | Inaccessible papillae | Yes | Yes | Yes | 10 |
| 7. | 60 | Ca head of Pancreas | Distal CBD | Inaccessible papillae | No | Yes | Yes | 10 |
| 8. | 81 | Ca head of Pancreas | Distal CBD | Inaccessible papillae | No | Yes | Yes | 10 |
| 9. | 63 | Ca head of Pancreas | Distal CBD | Inaccessible papillae | No | Yes | Yes | 8 |
| 10. | 78 | Periampullary tumor | Distal CBD | Inaccessible papillae | No | Yes | Yes | 8 |
| 11. | 71 | Ca head of Pancreas | Distal CBD | Inaccessible papillae | No | Yes | Yes | 8 |
| 12. | 63 | Ca head of Pancreas | Distal CBD | Failed/incomplete cannulation | Yes | Yes | Yes | 10 |
| 13. | 84 | Ca head of Pancreas | Distal CBD | Inaccessible papillae | No | Yes | Yes | 8 |
| 14. | 68 | Ca head of Pancreas | Distal CBD | Inaccessible papillae | No | Yes | Yes | 8 |
| 15. | 60 | Ca head of Pancreas | Distal CBD | Inaccessible papillae | No | Yes | Yes | 8 |
| 16. | 74 | Cholangiocarcinoma | Proximal CBD | Failed/incomplete cannulation | Yes | Yes | Yes | 10 |
| 17. | 64 | Periampullary tumor | Distal CBD | Inaccessible papillae | Yes | Yes | Yes | 10 |
| 18. | 70 | Ca head of Pancreas | Distal CBD | Inaccessible papillae | No | Yes | Yes | 10 |
| 19. | 76 | Ca head of Pancreas | Distal CBD | Inaccessible papillae | No | Yes | Yes | 10 |
| 20. | 67 | Ca head of Pancreas | Distal CBD | Inaccessible papillae | No | Yes | Yes | 8 |
Figure 2Pre‐ and post‐procedure bilirubin levels. , preprocedure bilirubin; , postprocedure bilirubin.
Figure 3Mean procedural time.
Overall outcome of the endoscopic ultrasound‐guided hepaticogastrostomy procedure
| Outcome ( | Value |
|---|---|
| Technical success, | 20 (100%) |
| Clinical success, | 19 (95%) |
| Reintervention rate, | 1 (5%) |
| Stent related complication rate, | 0 (0%) |
| Average length of stay (days) | 2.6 ± 2.41 |
Studies related to endoscopic ultrasound‐guided hepaticogastrostomy
| Author | Year |
| Type of stent | Procedural time, median (range) min | Technical success (%) | Clinical success (%) | Complication rate (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cho | 2017 | 21 | PCSEMS | 18 (11–45) | 21 (100) | 18 (85.7) |
4 (19) Pneumoperitoneum (2) Bleeding (1) Abdominal pain (1) |
| Minaga | 2017 | 30 |
PS (9) FCSEMS (20) | 39.5 (21–68) | 29 (97) | 22 (76) |
3 (10) Bile peritonitis (3) |
| Sportes | 2017 | 31 | FCSEMS | NA | 31 (100) | 25 (81) |
5 (16) Severe sepsis (2) Bile leak (2) Bleeding and death (1) |
| Amano | 2017 | 9 | PCSEMS | 14 (11–18) | 9 (100) | 9 (100) |
1 (11) Abdominal pain |
|
Moryoussef | 2017 | 18 | FCSEMS | NA | 17 (94) | 13 (76) |
1 (6) Bleeding and death |
| Honjo | 2018 | 49 | PCSEMS | NA | 49 (100) | ‐ |
11 (22) Abdominal pain (6) Bleeding (5) |
| Miyano | 2018 | 41 | PCSEMS | NA | 41 (100) | 41 (100) |
6 (15) Bile peritonitis (4) Cholangitis (1) Stent migration (1) |
| Okuno | 2018 | 20 | FCSEMS | 34 (16–98) | 20 (100) | 19 (95) |
3 (15) Cholangitis (3) |
| Current study | 2020 | 20 | PCSEMS | 40 (27–50) | 20 (100) | 19 (95) | 0 |
FCSEMS = fully covered self‐expandable metal stent; NA = not applicable; PCMS = partially covered self‐expandable metal stent; PS = plastic stent.